When are lies not lies

[Pond31]

I am been complaining about the biased approach of the prosecution in my case even thought it was NFA'd months ago. They have now responded to fact that police found evidence indicating that the FA lied by calling the lies "inconsistent evidence" rather than lies. Double standard, biased and corrupt organisation. They don't want to admit the truth because they know if they do then they would be forced to take action against my FA and explain why they didn't do it already.

[Peter1975]

I know you’re in NI pond but I will refer you to the cps guidance on prosecuting pcj issued under the unmissed Alison Saunders. It has been described as a set of excuses for hardly ever prosecuting and not without good reason. Making allowances for the genuinely vulnerable helps the false accusers escape and does a great disservice to the innocent.

[Pond31]

Hi All

I wonder if anyone can answer this question for me. Is suspicion of further crimes unrelated to the crime you were arrested for, legal justification for an arrest in that crime which otherwise could have been dealt with a voluntary interview.

Pond31

[totallylost]

I would also like to know the answer to your question. If you are already on bail for a crime and they suspect you of another crime can they then arrest you again for the new crime when you go back to answer your bail for the original crime. Surely you could be interviewed whilst there for your return to bail rather than arresting you on your arrival and putting you in a cell again?

[Peter1975]

Errr.... One for your solicitor to answer there I think pond..


If you are already on bail for a crime and they suspect you of another crime can they then arrest you again for the new crime when you go back to answer your bail for the original crime?

yes is the short answer TL although they don't necessarily have to wait until you're on their doorstep.


Thanks to Harvey Fox for the following;


The majority of interviews for all offences where you are not arrested at the scene are conducted voluntarily. The necessity criteria for arrest are set out in s110 Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. The difference with being arrested at the scene is that the prompt and effective criteria is met.



5)The reasons are—


(a)to enable the name of the person in question to be ascertained (in the case where the constable does not know, and cannot readily ascertain, the person's name, or has reasonable grounds for doubting whether a name given by the person as his name is his real name);

(b)correspondingly as regards the person's address;

(c)to prevent the person in question—

(i)causing physical injury to himself or any other person;

(ii)suffering physical injury;

(iii)causing loss of or damage to property;

(iv)committing an offence against public decency (subject to subsection (6)); or

(v)causing an unlawful obstruction of the highway;

(d)to protect a child or other vulnerable person from the person in question;


(e)to allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence or of the conduct of the person in question;

(f)to prevent any prosecution for the offence from being hindered by the disappearance of the person in question.

[Pond31]

Errr.... One for your solicitor to answer there I think pond..

Hi Peter1975

Thanks for you answer.

Pond31

[Pond31]

Hi All

OK another question or opinions sought. Here is the scenario:-

1) FA makes false accusations
2) The police come and arrest me based on nothing but the statement the FA gave
3) The Police investigate the case and gather evidence
4) The evidence contradicts a number of things said by the FA in her statement
5) The file is sent to the prosecutor
6) The prosecutor decides that the case does not pass the evidentiary test and I am NFA'd
7) The FA has phoned me 100's of times and in these calls she admits the sexual assaults I was arrested for were really consensual activity
8) I supply copies of the calls to the police and make a statement as I believe the FA is guilty of PCJ
9) The police now have the contradictory evidence they gathered themselves and the recorded calls I gave them and my statement
10) I request the police open a case of PCJ against my FA
11) The police refuse to open a case and give no reason.
12) I make a complaint about the OIC failure to investigate, which is still on going.

Now here is my question, how can the police refuse to open a file and investigate the FA for PCJ when they have my statement plus evidence they gathered plus evidence I gave them? If the police feel that they can arrest me on the FA's statement alone, how can they not open a case?

1) Do they have the right to refuse on public interest grounds
2) How can they act in such an biased manner or are their actions illegal
3) Can anyone see any justifications or legal reason why they can refuse to open a case?
4) Is the idea that they do not want to take action against FA's in order not to scare of genuine victims from reporting crimes a LEGAL biases for them not opening a PCJ case?

Pond31

[Casehardened]

I believe the link below is the one Peter referred to in his above post and I recollect that you mentioned elsewhere that the FA had mental health issues (?)....if so this excerpt from the document quotes one of the (many!) reasons for not bringing a charge of PCJ against them.


"the suspect appears not fully to have understood the seriousness of making a false allegation bearing in mind any learning disability or mental health issues."

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidanc...verting-course

[Pond31]

I believe the link below is the one Peter referred to in his above post and I recollect that you mentioned elsewhere that the FA had mental health issues (?)....if so this excerpt from the document quotes one of the (many!) reasons for not bringing a charge of PCJ against them.


"the suspect appears not fully to have understood the seriousness of making a false allegation bearing in mind any learning disability or mental health issues."

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidanc...verting-course

Hi Casehardened

The FA is a trained social worker and qualified while experiencing and being treated for her mental health issues. So not only does she understand the seriousness of making a false allegation, she understands more than most ordinary people. Her illness does not effect understanding as it does not effect her cognitive ability.

I understand this is why the CPS do not prosecute but it does not explain why the police will not investigate. They would need to open a file and see if the FA has understanding or not and then leave the charge decision to the CPS, not simply refuse to investigate.



Pond31

[HurtandConfused1]

Perhaps you could take your story to the media?

How does the law work about naming a FA after a NFA?

[Pond31]

Hi

I have been NFA'd but the question is for what. I am working nightshift at a Christmas job and therefore was in bed when the hard working postman arrived. I got out at bed after 5 pm and found a letter from the PPS. It gave me details and said that they had decided not to prosecute me for "an incident" that happen between 1st Day of January 2016 and 3rd September 2018. GREAT but which fecking one you idiots!!!!!! Is it FA2 obvious delusional claim of rape or FA1 false claim of criminal harassment. The letter does not give any details just reference numbers.

I phoned the police at the Rape Crime Unit but there was no answer and then phone the general police number. The police officer took my details but could not find which of the two cases had been resolved as the PPS reference numbers do not reflect the police numbers and the resolution had not be recorded in either. I had spoken to the PPS and I believe the case reference is the one for FA2 false accusation of rape, if so then that was a record decision time by the PPS as they only allocated the case to a prosecutor a WEEK ago. I will have to phone them tomorrow to find out which but I will not be very settled tonight.

Now if this is the rape case, which was only allocated to a prosecutor a week ago, and the NFA'd decision was taken so quickly then HOW FECKING ****E MUST THE CASE HAVE BEEN.

I shall confirm tomorrow.

Pond31

[Casehardened]

The banana boat is just offshore waiting to dock & unload.....

[Pond31]

The banana boat is just offshore waiting to dock & unload.....

Hi All

Get your fecking banana's out the boat has docked. NFA'd in case number 2. They took 7 days, NOT 7 MONTHS but 7 days to come to their decision. No asking the police to follow anything up, just a straight NFA. The case must have been weaker then a handshake from Jacob Rees-Mogg.

if you are easily offended please do not read any further......

THE POLICE ARE A BUNCH OF FECKING CUUNTS THEY KNEW THE CASE WAS SH!TE FROM THE START BUT INSTEAD OF DROPPING IT THEY WASTED MY AND THE PPS' TIME. I KNEW AT MY INTERVIEW IN RESPONSE TO THE ABE THAT THE FA WAS A LOONEY FECKING COW. THE PROBLEM IS SHE GETS AWAY WITH IT. ***** ***** I AM GOING TO TAKE ALL LEGAL STEPS I CAN AGAINST HER. FECKING CUUNTY POLICE.

Pond31

[Casehardened]

Yippee, fantastic news & an incredible timescale, lets hope its an omen for the future and not a one-off.......(perhaps the PPS lawyer reads this forum and got an insider view)

At long last, your well-deserved bananas.......

[Peter1975]

Congratulations Pond. Perhaps the quick decision is down to your persistence.

Great news at last anyway, well done